This player sounds really good. Great value for money.

I think the arcam alpha 7 sounds really good. The only problem I have with it is it's build quality. All the other equuipment I own by Rotel and Sony is built like a tank compared to the arcam. When I first got the unit it made horrible distorted sounds after a few hours of playing. I got a loaner unit and it did the same thing. I finally got a good one and it has worked great ever since. The dealer said that the problem was a bad resistor in the units DAC. I give the arcam four stars because of it's poor build quality. Other than the build it's a fine sounding player.

I reviewed the Arcam Vs Nad 712. Both were tested with Marantz CD67. The arcam worked with rogers GS3 speakers while the Nad operated with MS10 speakers. The combination of the Arcam/Marantz/Rogers gives a great sound, very sharp, good basses. Great for jazz listeners. I rate the Arcam 5 star due to the great performance it gives with reasonable price of an british made and designed amplifier.

I bought this player at the end of January and I am very satisfied with the sound. High’s are very clear but can sometimes err a bit on the wrong side of natural. Bass is fast and agile and well integrated to the soundstage. I auditioned it alongside Rega’s Planet which I did not like; much to slow and laid-back. I also compared it to the Marantz KI 63 which was better but a tad to soft and gentle for my taste. After all I feel that I bought the right CD-player for my system and musical tastes…
System
Thule PR100/PA120B
B&W 601 S2
Arcam Alpha 7

Very good amp for $450 considering that the price includes decent phono stage and line for headphones. System synergy, as always, is the key. Not a giant killer, but very good value. Works very well with decent CD player and Linn Index/Kan, Castle Isis, KEF Q35, or AE Aegis One. Good subsitution for Linn Majik if that's out of your price range. Detailed, smooth, and relaxed pretty much describes the sound. Seems like an amp for people who like the Linn sound (not Krell) but can't afford it. Not a brute though, no audio fireworks at this price. Doesn't blow you away with any particular aspect of performance, but doesn't get in the way of music either. Amp makes errors of ommission vs. commission (depends what your preference is). Comparisions:
NAD C340: Arcam is way better made (hit/miss NAD quality control problems) and a little sweeter up top. NAD's got better facilities, better bass, more firepower, but no phono (extra box). Tough choice. Good match w/PSB 600i, or Magnapan MMG. I think this NAD has probably the most well rounded sound for $, but I keep on hearing isolated stories of people having problems with them lately. NAD should really watch their quality control in production. Even though I have happily owned an NAD reciever for over 13 years, I stopped the recommendations to friends.

Rotel 951: Rotel is made in China (I heard AE Aegis is also), but appears well made. Good facilities, power, but pretty hard up top. Too thin, not a smooth or refined amp. But if you like the Paradigm and NHT speakers, and you need a few facilities, you'll like this better than the Arcam or Creek.

Creek 4330: The Creek is very special. Great slam and very aggressive. Better low and mid-range trans. than Rotel. Poor man's Naim Nait. Audio bargain. At home with more expensive speakers. However, no phono, tone controls (helps with bad recordings), or headphone. So really, its a $700 amp. Works with ProAc, Dynaudio, and of course Epos. However, Creek makes errors of commission rather than omission. Top end is very harsh and not as well made as the Arcam. Choose speakers and source carefully.

MF X-A1/Rega: Haven't heard them. Don't know. Look pretty cool though.

Marantz PM-55/Denon/Teac Ref/Yamaha/Sony ES: Forget it unless you just want a home theater. Won't last as long or sound as good as Creek, Rotel, or Arcam.

Conclusion: Choose the Creek or Arcam (??-Rega/MF) depending on your system and musical taste. Arcam is smoother and laid-back (My preference). Creek is more exciting and agressive.

Side Note--
Dealer in Chicago who wasn't selling me an amp said honestly that he would rank his integrateds like this: Naim, Rega, Arcam, Creek, Cambridge, Rotel.

Auditioned initially against the player it was due to replace, a Marantz CD50 SEhooked up through a Cambridge Audio Dacmagic 1, the Arcam immediately impressed with it's wider range of tonal colours and vibrancy of performance. And then the Rega Planet was wheeled out.
I suppose it all comes down to your own particular tastes and preferences sound-wise. For me, where the Arcam sounded exciting but a little shrill when the pace picked up, the Rega never lost it's composure.Maybe there is some justification in the occasional criticism that the Rega is laid back, but what appealed to me were the vast black silences between musicians on a large sound stage, a refusal to buckle under the heaviest rock and roll onslaught and a vastly superior build quality. This last point is something i've been rattling on for a while now. Why do so many otherwise decent components have to be made to look like a meccano set? This may seem like i'm compromising my enthusiast pretentions but if it's hideous, it's not for me and if it's the best sound in the shop, i'll shop elswhere.
Anyway, the Arcam is a fairly decent CD player (and definately an improvement over the Micromega Premium 18 player that i've commented on elsewhere) but my heart belongs to Rega and i'm more than happy with my purchase. The three players were auditioned through an old Cambridge Audio P70 integrated amp (since upgraded to an Electrocompaniet ECI-2) which had stood me in good stead for many years and resolutely refused to blow up, no matter what abuse I gave it (and I gave it plenty!) Speakers were Ruark Crusaders (the shop's-not mine.) I've reviewed both the Rega and Electro elsewhere if you're interested, along with Naim speaker cable and I recently posted another page on the Planet site regarding it's sensitivity to interconnects. Happy reading!

I auditioned several integrated amplifiers in the same price range before finally deciding to buy an Arcam Alpha 7R, Arcam Alpha 7 CD Player, Monitor Audio Silver 3's and Audioquest Topaz Interconnects. I listened to the Marantz PM-66 KI-S, the NAD 320, the Rotel RA-931 and even the higher priced Naim Nait 3. I found the Alpha 7R very detailed but pleasant sounding specially paired with the Silver 3's. I've tried it with KEF Q35 and the Silver 5's but the Silver 3's were more responsive and better sounding. As you know, each person has his own preference and idea of how the sound should be. It is important that this amplifier be auditioned with several speakers as they sounded bad to me with the KEF Q35; again due to personal preference. I've heard the KEF Q35's with the NAD and Naim and they sounded very nice. Overall, I found the Arcam Alpha 7R to very detailed, pleasant sounding and reasonably priced.

For the price, there are better choices. The power suply is very short.Try listen to Liszt transcendental study no. 10 with it and you'll see.

Detail, warmth

This player is good value for the money. It sounds very good with the right amplifier, and is easy on the pocket book. Let's face it, who would spend the ridiculous amound of money Arcam is asking for the "9"? My ears are not made of gold. I can live with the sound of the "7".

I bought my Arcam five months ago. I has served me very well. Before that I had a Marantz CD 63SE. The Arcam sound is more detailed and gives more puch to the music. I use it with a NAD 216 Pre - amp, 604 BW loudspeakers and a Harman Kardon 25 surrond reciver.

All in all, the Arcam gives great value for the money !!